Comparative Negligence

In the aftermath of a personal injury, understanding the legal concept of comparative negligence is crucial for anyone pursuing a claim. Comparative negligence plays a significant role in determining the compensation a plaintiff may receive based on their own contribution to the injury.

Comparative negligence is a legal doctrine applied in personal injury cases where the negligence of both the plaintiff and the defendant is considered. Unlike contributory negligence, which bars recovery if the plaintiff is found even slightly at fault, comparative negligence allows for a more equitable distribution of responsibility and compensation.

Colorado has a modified comparative negligence legal regime. That means that if the plaintiff has contributed to his or her injuries, the plaintiff’s recovery can be reduced by the amount. 

In states that follow comparative negligence, including Colorado, the court assesses the degree of fault for each party involved. The plaintiff’s recovery is then reduced by their percentage of fault. For instance, if a plaintiff is found 20% at fault and the total damages amount to $100,000, their recovery would be limited to $80,000.

However, if the plaintiff is found to be 50% at fault, the plaintiff does not recover anything. That means your attorney not only has to establish that the defendant was at fault, and that the plaintiff was injured by the accident, but also that the plaintiff acted reasonably. 

Comparative negligence can have a significant effect on estimated compensation. The degree of fault assigned to the plaintiff directly affects the final settlement or court-awarded amount. Navigating the intricacies of comparative negligence requires legal expertise. 

Skilled personal injury attorneys, such as those at Prager Law, can assess the details of your case, gather evidence, and present a compelling argument to minimize your degree of fault. Their expertise is invaluable in ensuring that you receive the maximum compensation possible.